Acts Sufficient for Accessory After the Fact

  1. bestmilitarydefensedefenseattorneys9.47.11PMcopyUnited States v. Davis, 42 M.J. 453 (C.A.A.F. 1996). Accused who falsely informed investigators that he did not know who committed larceny but hinted that someone other than the actual thief was responsible gave “assistance” to the actual offender, thereby making accused an accessory after the fact to larceny.
  2. United States v. Foushee, 13 M.J. 833 (A.C.M.R. 1982). Providing Q-tips and alcohol to clean blood off the knife used in an assault and to treat offender’s injured ankle constituted receipt, comfort, and assistance for the purposes of hindering or preventing the apprehension or trial of the offender. However, where evidence showed only that the accused knew the principal perpetrator had stabbed the victim with the knife but did not know the perpetrator intended to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm, accused could be convicted of being accessory after the fact to assault with a dangerous weapon but not assault with intent to murder. See also United States v. Marsh, 32 C.M.R. 252 (C.M.A. 1962) (advising perpetrator of theft to get rid of stolen goods and thereafter consuming liquor bought with proceeds); United States v. Tamas, 20 C.M.R. 218 (C.M.A. 1955) (concealing proceeds of a theft for purpose of assisting thief); United States v. Blevins, 34 C.M.R. 967 (A.F.B.R. 1964) (concealing and transporting proceeds of theft).
  3. United States v. Michaels, 3 M.J. 846 (A.C.M.R. 1977). Where accused has responsibility to protect particular property, accused is an accessory after the fact when he accepts money not to disclose completed larcenies.